Feature Request : MPE support

[Urs]

Also, if they can't finish it they should not call it standard and put their users on our case.

(what I mean is, it's a bit stupid to be pissed off with us, when clearly the companies that are pressing for a move to MPE can't get their homework done. Sure, we'll support +/- 48 semi pitch bend and CC74, no big deal, but we'll do it in our own time, not at the pressure of some people who were led to believe by hardware manufacturers that there was an existing standard)

[Restless]

Thing is, if a small company like us keeps implementing new standards as they come and change, we'll be broke before we finish anything. I think the past 5 years we've spent more than 20% of our time on whatever standard had to be implemented, but I doubt that the revenue was all that. So it's sheer self defense if we put these things aside until we can sure that we'll survive the effort. That also means we can't just do something with a draft or a beta standard anymore. We used that up on RE, NKS, Linux, AAX, VST3 and the current state of MPE support (of which I think NKS was the most profitable). No more, until it's set in stone.

It's your company, so obviously your call. My guess is that at some point you'll regret that decision, but who knows.

With the roli blocks now in apple stores, this will probably give a huge boost to the number of devices in use. I am not sure there will even be a standard, but I expect the number of devices out there using this type (or similar) of MIDI implementation to grow and become quite significant. Even before apple, the Roli store had delivery times of up to 5 weeks for the seaboard. After getting one, I can see why.

MPE will become a big thing, in my opinion.

One thing I haven't done is trying Diva, etc.. in Bitwig using Force MPE mode, now that I have the seaboard. Been reading that that kind of works.

Funny that NKS was the most profitable, I expect that one to go the way Kore did. The controllers are already at a discount, and having Maschine I found the usefulness quite limited , especially after playing the seaboard, and the amount of work I imagine it required to implement all that tagging.

[Restless]

(what I mean is, it's a bit stupid to be pissed off with us, when clearly the companies that are pressing for a move to MPE can't get their homework done. Sure, we'll support +/- 48 semi pitch bend and CC74, no big deal, but we'll do it in our own time, not at the pressure of some people who were led to believe by hardware manufacturers that there was an existing standard)

The pressure comes from having a seaboard rise in my studio and not being able to use its full potential with U-He synths.

Anyway, this won't go away, I don't think. This thread will keep getting bumped as more people get these controllers.

[Urs]

Well, we alraedy have a "similar" MIDI spec. Our stuff works fine with Linnstrument and others, which can be customised to work with any MIDI CC and any pitch bend range.

But before we deploy the esoteric side (master channels, channel ranges, mode switches etc), we want a proper standard, not a moving target.

I don't get why we would need to regret anything. We're on the forefront already.

[Urs]

Well, let's see. From a business standpoint, less than 1% of the customer base isn't exactly a big issue. If we do it anyway, it's because we see the potential and we're generally open to new ideas, even if they are not necessarily important. However, if this thread keeps pouring an unthankful vibe over us, it isn't exactly motivating.

Anyhow, we did what we could. For the time being we have other priorities, and I presume the hardware manufacturers would be wise to go the Linnstrument way and make their stuff work with "similar" implementations. Otherwise who knows how long they'll have to wait until they make a profit.

[Restless]

Well, let's see. From a business standpoint, less than 1% of the customer base isn't exactly a big issue. If we do it anyway, it's because we see the potential and we're generally open to new ideas, even if they are not necessarily important. However, if this thread keeps pouring an unthankful vibe over us, it isn't exactly motivating.

Anyhow, we did what we could. For the time being we have other priorities, and I presume the hardware manufacturers would be wise to go the Linnstrument way and make their stuff work with "similar" implementations. Otherwise who knows how long they'll have to wait until they make a profit.

Just out of curiosity, is Linn's implementation much different from Roli's?

[Urs]

I don't know. I just know it takes less than 4 seconds to set pitch bend range to +/- 24 or whatever.

The impression I get from Roli users is that it's tedious to use with our stuff. I would have tried it, but one can't just plug and play a Rise. We only have one machine to use it with, and it isn't mine. A Linnstrument doesn't need drivers or support software that needs to be registered.

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

I think the tediousness depends on the DAW. Yeah, you need to install drivers, but that's going to happen with a lot of today's controllers. From what I understand, Bitwig already supports MPE, and therefore, using a Roli with Diva should be no different than any other VSTi. Setting up MPE in Studio One (my DAW) is a nightmare on the other hand. I have to add Diva to the instrument list (not to a track) then add 16 MIDI tracks, one for each channel, then assign those channels to Diva. Setup in other DAWs are likely to be somewhere in between those two. Other than that, it's really not that bad.

One unexpected thing I've discovered recently is that the Roli mapping will conflict with my System-8/Diva mapping. I'd love to get the ability to create "Controller Profiles/Presets" in Diva's MIDI Mapping table so I can switch between different controllers/mappings more easily. I added this request to my Diva Wishlist thread.

I've had a Roli Rise on loan for a few weeks now, and I think users are reacting to the scariest basic reality of a Roli: this thing has a ton of potential, but it's success is entirely dependent on third-party instrument and DAW support. Once you've spent a few hours with a Rise, it's really hard not to be a fan. As a keyboardist, you already know how to play it (with some adjusting) and being able to do things like polyphonic bends and subtle vibrato like you're playing a guitar really opens up the expressiveness of supported instruments. I think you U-he guys would dig it. So users get their hands on this exciting instrument, and they want very desperately, for it to be successful, hence threads like this.

Compared to other VSTi's in my collection, U-he's support is already amongst the best. You're probably already 80% of the way to fully supporting the Rise. Considering how well it already works with U-he synths compared to many others, I'd like to see Roli owners 1) try out U-he synths before posting, compare them to others, and 2) if you want to voice support for expanded MPE in U-he synths, just ask nicely.

I'm not sure better MPE support will drive sales. Even if it would, that would certainly be difficult to quanitfy. But, I think you're already seeing that the Roli stuff is proving to be very successful (I see a lot more Roli owners than say Linnstruments) and owners will be a vocal [growing] minority just because it's a cool product. At best, improved MPE support may just endear U-he synths to the user base further (there's already a lot of overlap in the customer bases - hence why every developer doesn't have a long "support MPE" thread).

[igoramos]

I don't know. I just know it takes less than 4 seconds to set pitch bend range to +/- 24 or whatever.

The impression I get from Roli users is that it's tedious to use with our stuff. I would have tried it, but one can't just plug and play a Rise. We only have one machine to use it with, and it isn't mine. A Linnstrument doesn't need drivers or support software that needs to be registered.

I have a Seaboard RISE and Lightpad and am more than happy to help doing tests however I can. Of course I understand that may take time and not be useful to you but thought I'd offer anyways. I also appreciate the situation you are in an its easy to understand it from your point of view. Not sure what all the hub-bub is about it.

Though I haven't spent much time experimenting with the Roli and Bazille, as soon as I set the pitchbend range to 24 for the patch, switched the track in Bitwig to "Force MPE, I got Pitchbend (Roli Glide) and Brightness (Roli Slide) action happening and of course velocity. Not sure how to assign channel pressure or release velocity (Roli Lift) yet though.

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

igoramos, Channel Pressure is just "Aftertouch" in the U-he synths. So just assign something to be controlled by Aftertouch and you're all set!

[ulph]

Availability and price is a big blocker for the MPE success I would think. I have only been able to set my hands on a ROLI Seaboard RISE on a store here in sweden, and I suspect it was broken after some abuse. That said, I am pretty sure I'll get one of the controllers eventually... And naturally I'd love to use the awesome uhe softsynths to their fullest potential

[igoramos]

igoramos, Channel Pressure is just "Aftertouch" in the U-he synths. So just assign something to be controlled by Aftertouch and you're all set!

Thanks for the info/tip!

[NothanUmber]

However, if this thread keeps pouring an unthankful vibe over us, it isn't exactly motivating.

Just wanted to say that even though MPE support is by a huge margin my number one feature wish for the u-he synths I am both patient and thankful for every in-between step!
Continuum and Eigenharp players have been waiting a lot longer for suitable synths than Seaboard players - and the u-he synths were really exceptional regarding VpC support for a long time!
Hopefully the standardization will progress in 2017, having a final version would really help with acceptance - fingers crossed.

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

My guess is that even though the MPE standard is still open, Roli's current implementation is unlikely to change dramatically, if at all. I'm pretty sure the various Seaboards and Blocks are the most popular set of MPE products on the market at the moment, so they may end up leading the way just by default. If a documented MPE standard never gets finalized, does that change anything with the current-state Roli's? Doubt it.

[Urs]

Yes, and I reiterate: We'll do +/- 48 semi pitchbend and CC74. We'll do this in subsequent updates. If you spot an update without +/-48 semi pitchbend in any of our traditional public beta phases, remind us. About CC74, we'll do this with a general refactor of our standard MIDI controllers. Not sure if it's the next cycle of updates or teh one thereafter.

What I'm sceptic about is the whole thing about a master channel, number of channel restrictions, some kind of zones and a whole bunch of mode switches. Looking through different drafts, I found contradicting information and I think these might be moving targets.

Note that some of this stuff means sound quality compromise. In Zebra 3 for instance we will have modules that will either use excessive CPU if pitched beyond +24 semitones while playing, or possibly exhibit a lot of aliasing if pitched below -24 semitones. There are processes and algorithms that "prefer" not to be pitched in such extreme ways, but are absolutely fine within boundaries that have been considered reasonable before MPE.